Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Anesthesiology 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Comparison of the Supreme™ and ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airways in infants: a prospective randomised clinical study

Authors: Sibel Oba, Hacer Sebnem Turk, Canan Tulay Isil, Huseyin Erdogan, Pinar Sayin, Ali Ihsan Dokucu

Published in: BMC Anesthesiology | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Supreme™ and ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) are widely used in paediatric anaesthesia; however, LMA use in infants is limited because many anaesthesiologists prefer to use tracheal intubation in infants.
In this study, we compared the Supreme and ProSeal LMAs in infants by measuring their performance characteristics, including insertion features, ventilation parameters, induced changes in haemodynamics and rates of postoperative complications.

Methods

Infants of ASA physical status I scheduled for elective, minor, lower abdominal surgery were divided into two groups: the Supreme LMA group and the ProSeal LMA group. Times and ease of LMA insertion were noted. The percentages of tidal volume leakage as well as peak, mean and leakage pressures for all infants were measured. Heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation (SpO2) and end tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2) values were recorded before and after LMA insertion and before and after extubation. After extubation, complications and adverse effects were noted.

Results

Demographic and surgical data were similar between the two groups. LMA insertion times were shorter for the ProSeal group than for the Supreme group (P < 0.002). The mean HR value for the ProSeal group was lower than for the Supreme group (P < 0.011). Both the peak pressure and the leakage percentage for the ProSeal group were statistically lower than for the Supreme group. The leakage pressure for the ProSeal group was statistically higher than for the Supreme group (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The ProSeal LMA is superior to the Supreme LMA for use in infants due to the ease of insertion, high oropharyngeal leakage pressure and fewer induced changes in haemodynamics.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03251105, retrospectively registered on 15 Aug 2017.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lucie V, Harkouk H, Brasher C, Michelet D, Hilly J, Maesani M, Diallo T, Mangalsuren N, Nivoche Y, Dahmani S. Supraglottic airway devices vs tracheal intubation in children: a quantitative meta-analysis of respiratory complications. Paediatr Anaesth. 2014;24:1088–98.CrossRef Lucie V, Harkouk H, Brasher C, Michelet D, Hilly J, Maesani M, Diallo T, Mangalsuren N, Nivoche Y, Dahmani S. Supraglottic airway devices vs tracheal intubation in children: a quantitative meta-analysis of respiratory complications. Paediatr Anaesth. 2014;24:1088–98.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Kim MS, Lee JH, Han SW, Im YJ, Kang HJ, Lee JR. A randomized comparison of the i-gel with the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:405–12.CrossRefPubMed Kim MS, Lee JH, Han SW, Im YJ, Kang HJ, Lee JR. A randomized comparison of the i-gel with the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:405–12.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Kim J, Kim JY, Kim WO, Kil HK. An ultrasound evaluation of laryngeal mask airway position in pediatric patients: an observational study. Anesth Analg. 2015;120:427–32.CrossRefPubMed Kim J, Kim JY, Kim WO, Kil HK. An ultrasound evaluation of laryngeal mask airway position in pediatric patients: an observational study. Anesth Analg. 2015;120:427–32.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Jagannathan N, Ramsey MA, White MC, Sohn L. An update on newer pediatric supraglottic airways with recommendations for clinical use. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:334–45.CrossRefPubMed Jagannathan N, Ramsey MA, White MC, Sohn L. An update on newer pediatric supraglottic airways with recommendations for clinical use. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:334–45.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Aydogmus MT, Eksioglu B, Oba S, Unsal O, Türk HS, Sinikoglu SN, Tug A. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway proseal for laryngopharyngeal trauma and postoperative morbidity in children. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2013;63:445–9.CrossRefPubMed Aydogmus MT, Eksioglu B, Oba S, Unsal O, Türk HS, Sinikoglu SN, Tug A. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway proseal for laryngopharyngeal trauma and postoperative morbidity in children. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2013;63:445–9.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Sanket B, Ramavakoda CY, Nishtala MR, Ravishankar CK, Ganigara A. Comparison of second-generation supraglottic airway devices (i-gel versus LMA ProSeal) during elective surgery in children. AANA J. 2015;83:275–80.PubMed Sanket B, Ramavakoda CY, Nishtala MR, Ravishankar CK, Ganigara A. Comparison of second-generation supraglottic airway devices (i-gel versus LMA ProSeal) during elective surgery in children. AANA J. 2015;83:275–80.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Black AE, Flynn PE, Smith HL, Thomas ML, Wilkinson KA. Development of a guideline for the management of the unanticipated difficult airway in pediatric practice. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:346–62.CrossRefPubMed Black AE, Flynn PE, Smith HL, Thomas ML, Wilkinson KA. Development of a guideline for the management of the unanticipated difficult airway in pediatric practice. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:346–62.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Trevisanuto D, Cavallin F, Nguyen LN, Nguyen TV, Tran LD, Tran CD, Doglioni N, Micaglio M, Moccia L. Supreme laryngeal mask airway versus face mask during neonatal resuscitation: a randomized controlled trial. J Pediatr. 2015;167:286–91.CrossRefPubMed Trevisanuto D, Cavallin F, Nguyen LN, Nguyen TV, Tran LD, Tran CD, Doglioni N, Micaglio M, Moccia L. Supreme laryngeal mask airway versus face mask during neonatal resuscitation: a randomized controlled trial. J Pediatr. 2015;167:286–91.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Balkan BK, Günenç F, Iyilikçi L, Gökel E, Yaman A, Berk AT. The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in paediatric ophthalmic anaesthesia practice. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2005;22:77–9.CrossRefPubMed Balkan BK, Günenç F, Iyilikçi L, Gökel E, Yaman A, Berk AT. The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in paediatric ophthalmic anaesthesia practice. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2005;22:77–9.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Bhardwaj N, Yaddanapudi S, Singh S, Pandav SS. Insertion of laryngeal mask airway does not increase the intraocular pressure in children with glaucoma. Paediatr Anaesth. 2011;21:1036–40.CrossRefPubMed Bhardwaj N, Yaddanapudi S, Singh S, Pandav SS. Insertion of laryngeal mask airway does not increase the intraocular pressure in children with glaucoma. Paediatr Anaesth. 2011;21:1036–40.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Kim MS, Oh JT, Min JY, Lee KH, Lee JR. A randomised comparison of the i-gel™ and the laryngeal mask airway classic™ in infants. Anaesthesia. 2014;69:362–7.CrossRefPubMed Kim MS, Oh JT, Min JY, Lee KH, Lee JR. A randomised comparison of the i-gel™ and the laryngeal mask airway classic™ in infants. Anaesthesia. 2014;69:362–7.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Ali A, Canturk S, Turkmen A, Turgut N, Altan A. Comparison of the laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway classic in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26:1010–4.CrossRefPubMed Ali A, Canturk S, Turkmen A, Turgut N, Altan A. Comparison of the laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway classic in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26:1010–4.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Goldmann K, Roettger C, Wulf H. The size 1(1/2) ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in infants: a randomized, crossover investigation with the classic laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Analg. 2006;102:405–10.CrossRefPubMed Goldmann K, Roettger C, Wulf H. The size 1(1/2) ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in infants: a randomized, crossover investigation with the classic laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Analg. 2006;102:405–10.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Pant D, Koul A, Sharma B, Sood J. A comparative study of laryngeal mask airway size 1 vs. i-gel size 1 in infants undergoing daycare procedures. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:386–91.CrossRefPubMed Pant D, Koul A, Sharma B, Sood J. A comparative study of laryngeal mask airway size 1 vs. i-gel size 1 in infants undergoing daycare procedures. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25:386–91.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Hollande J, Riou B, Guerrero M, Landault C, Viars P. Comparison of hemodynamic effects of the laryngeal mask and the orotracheal tube. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 1993;12:372–5.CrossRefPubMed Hollande J, Riou B, Guerrero M, Landault C, Viars P. Comparison of hemodynamic effects of the laryngeal mask and the orotracheal tube. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 1993;12:372–5.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, Yahaya Z, Teo MM, Sia AT. Comparison of the LMA supreme vs the i-gel in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia. 2010;65:1173–9.CrossRefPubMed Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, Yahaya Z, Teo MM, Sia AT. Comparison of the LMA supreme vs the i-gel in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia. 2010;65:1173–9.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Verghese C, Ramaswamy B. LMA-supreme--a new single-use LMA with gastric access: a report on its clinical efficacy. Br J Anaesth. 2008;101:405–10.CrossRefPubMed Verghese C, Ramaswamy B. LMA-supreme--a new single-use LMA with gastric access: a report on its clinical efficacy. Br J Anaesth. 2008;101:405–10.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Wilson IG, Fell D, Robinson SL, Smith G. Cardiovascular responses to insertion of the laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia. 1992;47:300–2.CrossRefPubMed Wilson IG, Fell D, Robinson SL, Smith G. Cardiovascular responses to insertion of the laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia. 1992;47:300–2.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of the Supreme™ and ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airways in infants: a prospective randomised clinical study
Authors
Sibel Oba
Hacer Sebnem Turk
Canan Tulay Isil
Huseyin Erdogan
Pinar Sayin
Ali Ihsan Dokucu
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2253
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-017-0418-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Anesthesiology 1/2017 Go to the issue